Keith Packard writes:
> Maybe something like this?
That would work, yes. Thanks.
On 8/21/22 18:20, Po Lu wrote:
Alan Coopersmith writes:
Okay, but we also document that Xlib is thread safe if XInitThreads() has
been called, so both the patch suggested here to keep a static pointer to
a malloc'ed buffer and my suggestion of a global static buffer fail since
calls in
Alan Coopersmith writes:
> Thanks - while gitlab is our preferred method, when that's not possible,
> we prefer using the xorg-devel mailing list (cc'ed) instead of trying to
> guess which individual developer to contact.
Thanks for explaining. I thought xorg-devel was shut down and replaced
On 8/20/22 11:47, Thomas Dickey wrote:
On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 09:51:42AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Thanks - while gitlab is our preferred method, when that's not possible,
we prefer using the xorg-devel mailing list (cc'ed) instead of trying to
guess which individual developer to contact.
On 8/20/22 18:20, Po Lu wrote:
Alan Coopersmith writes:
Thanks - while gitlab is our preferred method, when that's not possible,
we prefer using the xorg-devel mailing list (cc'ed) instead of trying to
guess which individual developer to contact.
Thanks for explaining. I thought xorg-devel
On Sat, Aug 20, 2022 at 09:51:42AM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> Thanks - while gitlab is our preferred method, when that's not possible,
> we prefer using the xorg-devel mailing list (cc'ed) instead of trying to
> guess which individual developer to contact.
>
> This bug has been previously
was acceptable,
I'd just go with "static char s[10];" instead of malloc/realloc at all.
-alan-
On 8/20/22 01:56, Po Lu wrote:
Here's an untested fix for what I think is a leak in XKeysymToString.
I'm sorry if this is not the right way to reach an Xlib developer, but I
don't have
